The ShadowMusic Web Community

drakula63 wrote:I'm not sure if it's fair to compare the 1812 Overture by Tchaikovsky with Heaven is a Place on Earth or When the Going Gets Tough (The Tough Get Going).

Different kinds and quality of music I must admit, but in the end most orchestras just play cover versions too, although a lot of people somehow find it more acceptable.

iefje wrote:

drakula63 wrote:I'm not sure if it's fair to compare the 1812 Overture by Tchaikovsky with Heaven is a Place on Earth or When the Going Gets Tough (The Tough Get Going).

Different kinds and quality of music I must admit, but in the end most orchestras just play cover versions too, although a lot of people somehow find it more acceptable.

Without going into it too deeply, I suppose the main difference is that with orchestral music there is no 'definitive' or 'original' recording, as it were, but the orchestras down the ages just got the music on paper and played it. Much of the classical oeuvre was composed before the advent of recording devices. I realise that some recorded versions are considered better than others, and that there must, at some point, have been a 'first'... but I doubt that it was by Bach or Beethoven!

Blues music became a bit more exciting with the advent of the mostly British guitarists and groups of the 1960s... but it's still a tad boring and samey for me. Believe me, having played the drums in quite a few bands, I came to enjoy and dread the 'blues jam' in equal measure! It is an expressive kind of music which lends itself well to emotion and, dare I say it, solos... but in its purest form ("I woke up this morning, got out of bed, my woman had gone and left me, so I shot myself in the head") it does nothing for me at all. Apart from make me long for death.

I'll admit that until fairly recently, both Steppin' to the Shadows and Reflection were absent from my collection.

iefje wrote:The whole cover versions debate reminds me of something Hank has said in one of his interviews. What he said, came down to this: When orchestras play arrangements of centuries-old classical music, it's fine. When blues guitarists (like Eric Clapton) play arrangements of blues standards, it's fine. But when The Shadows, Hank Marvin and The Ventures (and other guitar groups) play their instrumental interpretations of familiar music, it's not done or highly criticised.

The key word there is 'interpretations'...as opposed to 'copies'. The Shadows' covers fall into both camps. Regarding the 'copies'...I can't ever imagine wanting to hear The Shads' recording of Albatross rather than Fleetwood Mac's; or Baker Street rather than Gerry Rafferty's; or Classical Gas rather than Mason Williams. And most of their late '80s recordings I wouldn't want to listen to by anyone! But I would rather listen to their recording of Semi-Detached Suburban in preference to Manfred Mann (apologies...I've said all this before!). And I love their versions of Superstar, and The Most Beautiful Girl because they aren't slavish copies. I've got an interview with Hank in a magazine where he states that jazz musicians often do their versions of standards...and no one asks them why they're doing them. To be fair, his solo material of the '90s tended to be more interpretative than The Shads covers of the '80s. Blues musicians' versions of songs are almost always interpretative (even if you don't care for blues music...!). I don't think you can really make the comparison with classical music. My father used to spend hours poring over his copies of The Record Guide which reviewed various versions of the Classical Music canon (for want of a better word!). In the classical 'world' - it's all about the original composition and the soloist(s)', chamber group's or orchestra's performance of it...in the pop world it's about the original recording; record your own version, by all means, but try to rearrange it creatively...try to add something to it. Santana's version of The Zombies' She's Not There is possibly the best example.
Most of The Shadows' '60s covers were interpretative - although some worked better than others and some (Cathy's Clown from the Jigsaw LP, for example) sound to me like filler. Rockin' With Curly Leads - much as I love the album as a whole - is where the copying started. I always omit the first track of each side when I play that record. Good though the recordings are (Jim once said that their recording of Pinball Wizard/See Me, Feel Me was one of the best album opening tracks ever...but it was a copy of a New Seekers record!!), who would honestly choose to listen to The Shadows' version of Good Vibrations rather than The Beach Boys?!

Well I wouldn't cross the road to see a band playing covers, may as well stay at home and put a record on! No, if I'm making the effort to go and see a band, then I want to hear their music.

My attitude to buying records (or whatever one does instead these days) is the same - I won't pay good money for something I've heard before!

Fortunately plenty of our members don’t take that view! Many of us play Shadows tunes, and others listen to us doing it. It seems to give plenty of pleasure all round, judging by the number of clubs and shows we/they put on.
But, yes, easier to stay home and put Apache on again.

Well Shadows club is only once a month, and if occasionally you don't feel like going, well you don't have to!

This is infinitely better than actually being in a band, bcause if you wake up in the morning and think "I really don't want to do this gig tonight," - tough, you're stuck with it.

I personally love the 80s output and I think some of the singles would have done better with better marketing - such as Pulaski and Mountains of the Moon, even Moonlight Shadow.

For me looking back it seems as though they'd always combined a couple of originals with well-known songs on *albums* - the difference being the well known songs went from being In the Mood or Brazil to recent top 40 songs, as though a That's That I Call Music album played by the Shads. It seems strange now to be playing the hits of, say, 1987, one after the other. Hank mixes up the time periods on his albums and that works better I think.

But in general the idea of liberating a tune from its (often boring) words and making the most of a great melody is very strong - and loads of people have done it such as Acker Bilk, Richard Clayderman... Not all songs work as instrumentals but the ones the Shads picked usually did.

I agree that the raw energy of the 60s and the inventiveness of the 70s is missing - but they're still great albums.

Why was there 2 versions on temptation? 2 one from burns era
Did they muck it up first time an updated version of Granada would have been nice

Some of their song choices at this time were dubious such as Eastenders Theme, I wanna dance with somebody or Heaven is a place on earth. I suspect the record company requested these to help with the sales.

I agree. Can't believe the Shadows actually chose to do them.